As a Republican how do you defend voter suppression?

[TerryMathews]

That's not true, and you know it. 8 states have election day registration, a number that I want to encompass all 50 states, so your 100% is bullshit.

It's also remarkable that what you advocate, strict voter ID, disenfranchises people who *are* registered-



from monovillage's link, above...

Oh, wait, you don't actually read links, do you?

Under the PATRIOT act, those items aren't sufficient to prove identity to open a bank account. Why would they be sufficient to vote?

 

[monovillage]

Under the PATRIOT act, those items aren't sufficient to prove identity to open a bank account. Why would they be sufficient to vote?

They're also not sufficient for buying a firearm which is a Right under the Constitution.

 

[ivwshane]

1. I don't agree they're virtually non-existent.

2.I don't agree that it does or will disenfranchise voters.

3.I don't agree that States must supply IDs for free.

4.I think Democrats are stupid for not making a path that people can get free IDs.

5. You are an ignorant and biased twerp.

6. Your faux outrage is delicious.

1) your beliefs are based on what facts?

2) the courts disagree with you and their opinion is what matters not yours.

3) Well then you are a liar as your previous post indicated that they should (no sarcasm tag or any indication of such was given). Even if you were being sarcastic you think it's ok for the state to make laws with no way for some citizens to follow them.

4) and this explains why you are fucking retarded. Let one group of politicians pass laws and let the other group clean up their mess and complain about it not being cleaned up fast enough. Yeah that's sounds like the M.O. of a righty.

5) lol, hello pot

6) of course you would find it delicious, you think lessening the voter pool is great, how unamerican of you.

I take comfort that you are an old man with old ideas and will die soon and with you so will your unpatriotic view points

 

[Jhhnn]

Under the PATRIOT act, those items aren't sufficient to prove identity to open a bank account. Why would they be sufficient to vote?

Do you lose access to your bank accounts if your ID expires, if you lose it & have trouble replacing it?

Obviously not.

Millions of Americans have no bank accounts for one reason or another, which really has no bearing on their right to vote.

 

[monovillage]

1) your beliefs are based on what facts?

2) the courts disagree with you and their opinion is what matters not yours.

3) Well then you are a liar as your previous post indicated that they should (no sarcasm tag or any indication of such was given). Even if you were being sarcastic you think it's ok for the state to make laws with no way for some citizens to follow them.

4) and this explains why you are fucking retarded. Let one group of politicians pass laws and let the other group clean up their mess and complain about it not being cleaned up fast enough. Yeah that's sounds like the M.O. of a righty.

5) lol, hello pot

6) of course you would find it delicious, you think lessening the voter pool is great, how unamerican of you.

I take comfort that you are an old man with old ideas and will die soon and with you so will your unpatriotic view points

1. The fact that there are numerous recorded cases of vote fraud across the country.

2. No, the Supreme Court agrees with me.

3. You are a liar, it's extremely easy for people to get a valid ID, extremely easy, just not free.

4.You are a dweeb and an inbred idiot, careful you may get a letter from a friend you just haven't met yet.

5.I have no problem being considered a partisan hack, it's only assholes like you that are hypocritical enough to deny it that care.

6.Yes, I find your faux outrage tears delicious.

7. Typical Democrat/liberal to wish hate and death on people they disagree with, I love you anyways.

 

[cybrsage]

Do you lose access to your bank accounts if your ID expires, if you lose it & have trouble replacing it?

Obviously not.

Millions of Americans have no bank accounts for one reason or another, which really has no bearing on their right to vote.

Try closing out the account without ID...

 

[ivwshane]

Do you lose access to your bank accounts if your ID expires, if you lose it & have trouble replacing it?

Obviously not.

Millions of Americans have no bank accounts for one reason or another, which really has no bearing on their right to vote.

All they is point to other things in life that require an ID and yet they can't give a valid reason for why there should be one.


Let me try some of their logic:

I think there should be a processing fee of $1000 for every gun bought. It would cut down on the amount of guns being bought and therefor gun violence would go down. I also think all gun owners should be required to take a consecutive four week training course at a cost of $4000 before they can own a gun or within six months of such laws being passed. The reasons for the course are obvious.




John, go ahead and proof read that and see if I made a compelling righty argument.

 

[cybrsage]

1. The fact that there are numerous recorded cases of vote fraud across the country.

2. No, the Supreme Court agrees with me.

3. You are a liar, it's extremely easy for people to get a valid ID, extremely easy, just not free.

4.You are a dweeb and an inbred idiot, careful you may get a letter from a friend you just haven't met yet.

5.I have no problem being considered a partisan hack, it's only assholes like you that are hypocritical enough to deny it that care.

6.Yes, I find your faux outrage tears delicious.

7. Typical Democrat/liberal to wish hate and death on people they disagree with, I love you anyways.

He is just all butt hurt that his hypocrisy was clearly shown for all to mock him over.

 

[monovillage]

All they is point to other things in life that require an ID and yet they can't give a valid reason for why there should be one.


Let me try some of their logic:

I think there should be a processing fee of $1000 for every gun bought. It would cut down on the amount of guns being bought and therefor gun violence would go down. I also think all gun owners should be required to take a consecutive four week training course at a cost of $4000 before they can own a gun or within six months of such laws being passed. The reasons for the course are obvious.




John, go ahead and proof read that and see if I made a compelling righty argument.

You didn't, there's already large fees, background checks, safety training, waiting periods and other hoops gun owners/buyers have to hop though to exercise their right to own a firearm, at least in my state. Not a bad try, maybe you should look into the restrictions that gun owners have to face so you can find true outrage instead of the whiny faux type.

http://lapd.com/assets/tbl_weber_aug2012.pdf

 

[ivwshane]

1. The fact that there are numerous recorded cases of vote fraud across the country.

2. No, the Supreme Court agrees with me.

3. You are a liar, it's extremely easy for people to get a valid ID, extremely easy, just not free.

4.You are a dweeb and an inbred idiot, careful you may get a letter from a friend you just haven't met yet.

5.I have no problem being considered a partisan hack, it's only assholes like you that are hypocritical enough to deny it that care.

6.Yes, I find your faux outrage tears delicious.

7. Typical Democrat/liberal to wish hate and death on people they disagree with, I love you anyways.

1) there are numerous? Show me 100 cases of voter fraud in the last 10 years. That shouldn't be hard to do, roughly 60 million people vote each election, 100 cases equals .00000167%. I wouldn't call that numerous but I'll let it slide.

2) yes the supreme court upheld the Indiana law do you know why? Because the ID's are free and there are also free alternatives. However other state laws do not have these provisions.

3) Well if you say it is then it must be true! What a sad world you live in that it is so small that you know the struggles of every man.

4) lol, are you projecting?

5) well the first step in dealing with a problem is admitting you have a problem. Congratulations. You wear that badge!

6) enjoy them while you can.

7) typical righty failing at reading comprehension again, I never wished any ill will towards you, I just take comfort in the fact that your time on this planet is coming to an end.
You don't know what love is so its a meaningless gesture.

 

[ivwshane]

You didn't, there's already large fees, background checks, safety training, waiting periods and other hoops gun owners/buyers have to hop though to exercise their right to own a firearm, at least in my state. Not a bad try, maybe you should look into the restrictions that gun owners have to face so you can find true outrage instead of the whiny faux type.

http://lapd.com/assets/tbl_weber_aug2012.pdf

Oh are you outraged? Why because your rights are being taken away? Nope you can still get guns. Oh you are outraged because of the fees and hoops you have to go through just to get a gun, which is a constitutional right!

That's where the true outrage is! But guess what!? I don't own a gun so none of that affects me

Oh your faux outrage tastes so delicious!!

Lol!!! Quick edit your post your hypocrisy is showing!!!




How did I do John? They fell for it a lot quicker than I thought.

 

[monovillage]

Oh are you outraged? Why because your rights are being taken away? Nope you can still get guns. Oh you are outraged because of the fees and hoops you have to go through just to get a gun, which is a constitutional right!
That's where the true outrage is! But guess what!? I don't own a gun so none of that affects me
Oh your faux outrage tastes so delicious!!
Lol!!! Quick edit your post your hypocrisy is showing!!!
How did I do John? They fell for it a lot quicker than I thought.

Nope, not outraged, just pointing out the facts ma'am, just the facts.

If you don't vote, then it won't be a problem for your faux outrage.

Again, no outrage either actual or faux, just stating the facts ma'am.

In regards to your previous post if I bitchslap you 10 times as I'm doing in this thread do you call it numerous?

 

[ivwshane]

Nope, not outraged, just pointing out the facts ma'am, just the facts.

If you don't vote, then it won't be a problem for your faux outrage.

Again, no outrage either actual or faux, just stating the facts ma'am.

In regards to your previous post if I bitchslap you 10 times as I'm doing in this thread do you call it numerous?

Lol, yeah sure you aren't outraged, you just said that if there is anything to be outraged about its the gun laws. You got caught in your web of hypocrisy and you know it and all I can do now is laugh at the small man that you are.


Still waiting for those numerous examples.


While you were bitchslapping, you just got knocked the fuck out!

 

[monovillage]

Lol, yeah sure you aren't outraged, you just said that if there is anything to be outraged about its the gun laws. You got caught in your web of hypocrisy and you know it and all I can do now is laugh at the small man that you are.


Still waiting for those numerous examples.


While you were bitchslapping, you just got knocked the fuck out!

Well over 100 examples of convicted fraud in Minnesota that got AlFranken elected. Gosh that was tough. slap, slap, slap, slap......113 times slapped.

 

[Jhhnn]

Try closing out the account without ID...

And? So what?

 

[Jhhnn]

Well over 100 examples of convicted fraud in Minnesota that got AlFranken elected. Gosh that was tough. slap, slap, slap, slap......113 times slapped.

Sources, sir, sources. How many of those would have been affected by voter ID requirements?

http://www.minnpost.com/politics-po...d-election-fraud-found-virtually-non-existent

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...9f9b66c-e18e-11e1-89f7-76e23a982d06_blog.html

The voter ID constitutional amendment supposedly is an effort to prevent alleged voter fraud. A report based on data from Minnesota county attorneys in November 2010, found 26 convictions for voter fraud in 2008, and they all pertained to felons voting. The report also indicated that there were only seven investigations of voter impersonation and not one conviction, with 2,921,498 votes cast in 2008.

So the only evidence of voter fraud pertained to felons, and requiring government-issued photographic identification will not address that problem.

http://postbulletin.com/news/stories/display.php?id=1504976

Your contentions stem from misrepresentations of felons voting as having something to do with having picture ID. The two are totally unrelated.

This article attempts the same, but they do list the 113 cases of fraud conviction that voter ID wouldn't have changed in the slightest-

http://www.electionintegritywatch.com/documents/2011-Report-Voter-Fraud-Convictions.pdf

Wait... I forgot- you don't read links.

 

[monovillage]

A problem jhhnn, the voted ID movement is just a contributing factor in preventing vote fraud, it isn't a catch all or prevent all, it's just a tiny step to comprehensive legislation to make elections more crime free and fair. The fact that so many felons illegally voted and were convicted in Minnesota is just an indication that more steps are needed to prevent that type of crime in the future.

The 113 convicted vote fraudsters in Minnesota were enough to get AlFranken elected, I'm just trying to prevent such tragedies from occurring in the future.

 

[ivwshane]

The 113 convicted vote fraudsters in Minnesota were enough to get AlFranken elected, I'm just trying to prevent such tragedies from occurring in the future.

So you support laws that don't address the problem they are trying to fix? Sound pretty wasteful, oh and it affects legal citizens negatively? Why do you hate America? Why do you support big government?

You claim to want to prevent such tragedies from happening again, what exactly are you doing about it?

I don't want felons having guns, no one does, does making a law restricting gun rights solve that?

 

[Jhhnn]

A problem jhhnn, the voted ID movement is just a contributing factor in preventing vote fraud, it isn't a catch all or prevent all, it's just a tiny step to comprehensive legislation to make elections more crime free and fair. The fact that so many felons illegally voted and were convicted in Minnesota is just an indication that more steps are needed to prevent that type of crime in the future.

The 113 convicted vote fraudsters in Minnesota were enough to get AlFranken elected, I'm just trying to prevent such tragedies from occurring in the future.

You concede that you attempt to conflate separate issues into one to support voter ID, that not one of the 113 cases you offered up would have been prevented by voter ID.

Why would you claim that they would have been, and why do you claim that 113 votes were Franken's margin of victory rather than 312, the true number?

Do you have some magical powers that let you determine which way they voted, anyway?

 

[monovillage]

So you support laws that don't address the problem they are trying to fix? Sound pretty wasteful, oh and it affects legal citizens negatively? Why do you hate America? Why do you support big government?

You claim to want to prevent such tragedies from happening again, what exactly are you doing about it?

I don't want felons having guns, no one does, does making a law restricting gun rights solve that?

If you look at wikipedias definition of what vote suppression is you'll see they include preventing felons from voting. You'll also see they include removing ineligible voters from voting rolls and include such a small and simple thing as requiring a voter ID as voter suppression. I don't agree with any of their definitions. Read it, it's worth a fucking laugh.
"Inequality in Election Day resources" - lol
"Felon disenfranchisement"- lol

Impediments to voter registration- isn't this what cybrsage was talking about?

Still no reaction to the fact that the red state of Nebraska has electoral votes by district and my state of California steals 20-25 electoral votes every election from Republicans and it's only because voter suppression and vote stealing from Republicans is ok to partisan assholes like yourself.

 

[monovillage]

You concede that you attempt to conflate separate issues into one to support voter ID, that not one of the 113 cases you offered up would have been prevented by voter ID.

Why would you claim that they would have been, and why do you claim that 113 votes were Franken's margin of victory rather than 312, the true number?

Do you have some magical powers that let you determine which way they voted, anyway?

I concede nothing Jhhnn. They're fucking felons, of course they would have voted for a Democrat.

 

[monovillage]

According to Holder, Obama and the lefties in this forum, this isn't voter suppression, but having to show a picture ID card is suppression.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU

 

[Jhhnn]

According to Holder, Obama and the lefties in this forum, this isn't voter suppression, but having to show a picture ID card is suppression.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=neGbKHyGuHU

Duh-vert! Duh-vert! Duh-vert!

 

[Jhhnn]

I concede nothing Jhhnn. They're fucking felons, of course they would have voted for a Democrat.

Heh. More dishonesty &obfuscation. There are some rather notable Repub felons...

You do have amazing powers of attribution, too bad they're lacking any factual basis...

 

[monovillage]

You don't like it, but that's not a particular concern of mine. I don't accept the leftist definition of what voter suppression is i.e. (show ID, felons voting, equal resources) and they(you) don't consider threats and intimidation to be voter suppression.

You're the one who's being dishonest, both intellectually and morally.